French President Emmanuel Macron just ahead of the start of Friday’s Munich Security Conference, which will run through the weekend, declared that only Ukraine’s President Zelensky can negotiate with Putin.

It was a shot across the bow warning against Trump’s peace plan, the contours of which are beginning to show, with the French leader saying it could amount to “capitulation” if Russia isn’t forced to make any serious concessions. 

Macron warned in a fresh interview with the Financial Times that a “peace that is a capitulation” would be “bad news for everyone” – including the United Sates and that fundamentally it must be the Ukrainians driving the talks.

Yet the reality is that Ukraine is not in the driver’s seat on the battlefield, where the conflict is being decided. And the outcome of talks is going to reflect this lack of true military leverage.

Macron continued, “The only question at this stage is whether President Putin is genuinely, sustainably and credibly willing to agree to a ceasefire on this basis. After that, it’s up to the Ukrainians to negotiate with Russia.”

Thus Macron did make clear that he’s open to this “window of opportunity” for a negotiated solution which Trump is jump-starting. He said that “everyone has to play their role.”

There are aspects of Trump’s emerging plan that Macron appears to have welcomed, per the FT:

Nonetheless, the French president endorsed the Trump administration’s position that it was Europe’s responsibility to ensure Ukraine’s security, saying it stemmed from a generational and bipartisan shift in America’s foreign policy priorities away from Europe and towards Asia.

US unilateralism did not start with Trump’s return to power, Macron added, noting that he “did not receive a call” in advance from the Biden administration about its “Aukus” nuclear submarine deal with Australia and the UK or about its withdrawal from Afghanistan. “What Trump is saying to Europe is that it is up to you to carry the burden. And I say, it is up to us to take it on,” Macron said.

Trump policy toward Europe and ending the Ukraine war is now widely being referred to as ‘electroshock’ in various publications after the Macron interview:

The message is clear – an ‘electroshock’, as French President Emmanuel Macron called it: European countries will have to step up defense spending if they intend to protect themselves from Russian aggression.

Macron to the FT : Trump brought “ element of strategic disruption”. It’s for Zelenskyy “alone” to discuss “territorial and sovereignty issues”. And “up to the international community, with a specific role for the Europeans, to discuss security guarantees
https://t.co/5O46RaDf7z

— roula khalaf (@khalafroula) February 14, 2025

Other European leaders have displayed outright anger over what they say is going over Zelensky’s head and showing willingness to deal directly with Putin. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Friday blasted the potential for peace talks that would cut out Zelensky or the Europeans.

“A sham peace — over the heads of Ukrainians and Europeans — would gain nothing,” Baerbock said at the start of the security conference. “A sham peace would not bring lasting security, neither for the people in Ukraine nor for us in Europe or the United States,” she added, according to Reuters.

For Meta Platforms’ multi-week stock rally to continue the upward momentum and achieve a near-term $2 trillion market capitalization, a timely late-morning report outlined the social media giant’s next big move: AI-powered humanoid robots.

Bloomberg reports that Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta plans to invest in futuristic robots that can perform human tasks. This initiative will be under a new team formed within its Reality Labs hardware division, according to sources familiar with the investment. 

The humanoid robots will be trained on the most typical household chores. 

Here’s more from the report:

Meta plans to work on its own humanoid robot hardware, with an initial focus on household chores. Its bigger ambition is to make the underlying AI, sensors and software for robots that will be manufactured and sold by a range of companies, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the initiative hasn’t been announced.

Meta has started discussing its plan with robotics companies, including Unitree Robotics and Figure AI Inc. 

Meta’s dive into humanoid robots mirrors Elon Musk’s Tesla Optimus, a bi-pedal, autonomous humanoid robot designed to complete unsafe, repetitive, or boring tasks.  

Wish me luck pic.twitter.com/k5rSj6NkbB

— Tesla Optimus (@Tesla_Optimus) February 14, 2025

Meta confirmed the creation of the new Reality Labs team, which will focus on the development of AI-powered humanoid robots. The team will be led by Marc Whitten, who resigned earlier this month as CEO of General Motors’ Cruise self-driving car division.

“The core technologies we’ve already invested in and built across Reality Labs and AI are complementary to developing the advancements needed for robotics,” Meta CTO Andrew Bosworth wrote in a memo that Bloomberg reviewed. 

The report sent Meta shares higher, up about 1.3% in the late morning trading session, into record-high territory. Shares are on track for a 20-day rally and just $150 billion shy of a $2 trillion market cap. 

The timing of the Meta report was critical and added just enough momentum to keep the pump alive into the lunch hour. 

Update(11:50ET): Just before going into his scheduled meeting with Ukraine’s President Zelensky, Vice President J.D. Vance has pushed back against the international headlines which claimed he threatened military action against Russia if it doesn’t take a deal to end the war, based on a Friday published WSJ interview. Here’s what Vance clarified on X:

President Trump is the ultimate deal maker and will bring peace to the region by ending the war in Ukraine. As we’ve always said, American troops should never be put into harm’s way where it doesn’t advance American interests and security. This war is between Russia and Ukraine. https://t.co/8CDpLkSaY7

— JD Vance (@JDVance) February 14, 2025

As we noted below, this comes on the heels of Defense Secretary Hegseth also clarifying: “To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be US troops deployed to Ukraine,” he said.

It’s also clear that the US administration has laid out a stance that Europe must ultimately be responsible for Ukraine’s security.

Hence, Vance’s statement also assures that American “troops should never be put into harm’s way where it doesn’t advance American interests and security. This war is between Russia and Ukraine.”

Indeed, the WSJ made big assumptions and inferences, based on an aside in the interview, which was picked up internationally:

Trump is indeed seeking to disentangle American troops from foreign quagmires, most especially in eastern Europe, and not bog the Pentagon down further, as has been the mandate given by American voters.

* * *

Now that Trump and Putin have agreed to organize a summit in hopes of fast-tracking Ukraine peace, each side is trying to build up leverage going in, and that’s resulting in a return to some provocative and jingoistic threats. 

Vice President JD Vance while at the Munich Security Conference warned that Washington could hit Russia with more sanctions and even use “military tools” on the table if it refuses to agree to a deal allowing Ukraine’s long-term independence. He issued the words to The Wall Street Journal, saying “There are economic tools of leverage, there are of course military tools of leverage.”

“There are any number of formulations, of configurations, but we do care about Ukraine having sovereign independence,” the vice president continued.

This was the most hawkish warning yet issued by the Trump administration in the context of pressing for a final Ukraine negotiated settlement with Moscow. He further assured European allies that Trump will not go into talks with Putin with “blinders on” and that “He’s going to say, ‘Everything is on the table, let’s make a deal.”

Vance also said: “I think there is a deal that is going to come out of this that’s going to shock a lot of people.”

And at the conference itself…

Vance is expected to meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy later Friday for talks that many observers, particularly in Europe, hope will shed at least some light on Trump’s ideas for a negotiated settlement to the war.

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier told the conference that everyone “wants this war to end.” But “how this war ends,” he said, “will have a lasting influence on our security order and on the position of power of Europe and America in the world.”

Kiev, as well as some in Washington, have been worried that the administration squandered its biggest leverage in Defense Secretary Hegseth’s declaration earlier this week that there will be no future NATO membership for Ukraine.

“Ukraine must negotiate from a position of strength, with strong and reliable security guarantees, and that NATO membership would be the most cost-effective for partners,” Zelenskyy said on X.

And then uber-hawks like Bolton sounded off, reflecting the old Republican neocon mentality which Trump has been warring against…

It is unconscionable to allow Russia to assault Ukraine’s sovereignty, recruit enemies like North Korea to aid in their fight, and then sell out the Ukrainians by conceding the loss of their territory and NATO security guarantees or membership. By making these and others…

— John Bolton (@AmbJohnBolton) February 13, 2025

Last year, NATO officials, including the Secretary-General himself – not infrequently talked up an “irreversible path” to eventual membership in the alliance, but those hopes were dashed with Hegseth’s speech before NATO HQ in Brussels.

“The United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement,” Hegseth had said, adding that security guarantees for Ukraine “must be backed by capable European and non-European troops.”

“To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be US troops deployed to Ukraine,” he said. His newest Friday remarks of a military option on the table if Putin refuses to make a deal somewhat contradicts this prior assurance. However, it’s also clear that the administration has laid out a stance that Europe must ultimately be responsible for Ukraine’s security.

How much longer until Ukrainians get what happened to them pic.twitter.com/UhMKc1DPOd

— Mark Ames (@MarkAmesExiled) February 13, 2025

The Europeans continue to express anger over Trump essentially going over Zelensky’s head and showing willingness to deal directly with Putin. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Friday blasted the potential for peace talks that would cut out Zelensky or the Europeans.

“A sham peace — over the heads of Ukrainians and Europeans — would gain nothing,” Baerbock said at the start of the security conference. “A sham peace would not bring lasting security, neither for the people in Ukraine nor for us in Europe or the United States,” she added, according to Reuters.

Zelensky remains skeptical and resistant…

Zelensky:

I don’t think that the US has a ready plan to end the war.

I will hold talks today with the US Vice President Vance on the situation in Ukraine. pic.twitter.com/7jLRNbsYkC

— Clash Report (@clashreport) February 14, 2025

Moscow is meanwhile cautioning that it could take months for talks to get off the ground, walking back some of its initial obvious enthusiasm – again in an attempt to maintain its leverage. State media was positively giddy when Trump spoke to Putin in a 90-minute call this week, and as Hegseth denied NATO membership for Ukraine. Neither side wants to look too ‘eager’ at this early phase. It could indeed become a long-haul before a peace deal is hopefully reached.

But the longer it takes to achieve ceasefire and peace, the more potential for some kind of destructive and shocking mass event which triggers bigger escalation between Russia and the West. Such as…

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy says that a Russian attack drone carrying “a high-explosive warhead” struck the Chornobyl nuclear power plant, piercing the protective structure over reactor no. 4 — the site of the 1986 disaster. Video and photos show a large hole and fire, now… https://t.co/ObACvCOnGz

— Christopher Miller (@ChristopherJM) February 14, 2025

By Bas van Geffen, senior macro strategist at Rabobank

He may not like the Fed’s policies much, but President Trump sure seems to like the central bank’s methods. Yesterday was “THE BIG ONE: RECIPROCAL TARIFFS!!! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” Trump had flagged earlier that his team was working on reciprocal tariffs, and before the actual press announcement, this Truth gave another bit of forward guidance.

And, in fact, the entire announcement felt a little like forward guidance from the US President: the reciprocal tariffs will only be brought into effect some weeks from now, leaving room for countries to negotiate, or perhaps, lower their own tariff rates in order to avoid being hit by these new reciprocal rates.

The complexity of determining reciprocal tariffs on thousands of products from more than 150 countries could be another reason for the delay. And its not as easy as comparing current tariff rates: President Trump also explicitly mentions non-trade barriers. The US probably does not want to copy these one-for-one, since that would put part of US’ trade policies under the control of its trading partners. But discounting non-trade barriers into a fair tariff rate will be more challenging.

Furthermore, the plans include “examining non-reciprocal trade relationships, […] including any unfair, discriminatory, or extraterritorial taxes […], including a value added tax” Extraterritorial taxes is a clear hint at the Digital Services Taxes imposed by several European Union member states. But his inclusion of value-added taxes is a bit more curious, perhaps.

Why is VAT so important in reciprocal tariffs? Here is the tariff increase with and without VAT. Trump just said he will include VAT. pic.twitter.com/pdJDhYmZwT

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 13, 2025

In a Truth, he again underscored that “for purposes of this United States Policy, we will consider Countries that use the VAT System, which is far more punitive than a Tariff, to be similar to that of a Tariff.” Does this mean that any country that charges a higher VAT than the US will see the difference added on in the form of an import tariff? Note that the United States do not charge a VAT; there are sales taxes that can differ per state.

Moreover, one can certainly wonder what Trump finds so unfair about VAT. The system is commonly applied on all goods sold, whether imported or domestically produced. So it appears that, within any country, a VAT does not favor domestic products over US exports.

But there may be some method to this madness. The US President wants to rebalance trade flows, and nudging countries off the VAT system might be a means to that end. If the US forces its trading partners to adopt lower VAT rates, the respective governments would have to generate revenue from other sources, say corporate or income taxes. This accomplishes two things. First, it may raise the relative costs of production in the foreign country – especially if the US is deregulating and cutting taxes at the same time. Secondly, even if the average tax rate does not change when the country switches from VAT to income tax, the relative cost of consumption decreases. And higher consumption in the trading partner might benefit US net exports to the country.

Whether this forward guidance was Trump’s plan all along, or just happy coincidence, the April 1 deadline (not a joke!) appears to be far enough away for markets to shrug most of the tariff news off. Although the tariffs could cause upheaval in global trade, there is still plenty of hopium that world leaders will try to strike a deal with the US president.

Dialogue and negotiations are certainly one element of the European Union’s response. But one of the EU’s top officials reportedly already tried this angle ahead of the steel and aluminium tariffs, and failed to de-escalate the trade tensions. So the bloc is also preparing to hit back hard. A first package of counter-tariffs is reportedly ready to be deployed, as a response to Trump’s planned tariff hike on steel and aluminium. On March 31, the suspension of counter-tariffs to Trump’s 2018 aluminium and steel tariffs expires. If the EU does not vote to extend this, these tariffs will automatically come into force again.

Moreover, since Trump’s first term, the EU has significantly extended its options to respond to any trade tensions. For example, the European Union’s new ‘Anti-Coercion Instrument’ could be deployed if Brussels believes that tariffs and other trade policies are being used to coerce a policy change elsewhere. Tariffs in order to get European countries to drop their digital services taxes, or to change their VAT system, arguably both fall into this category. The instrument is yet untested, but potentially very powerful. In addition to import and export restrictions on goods and services, it would also allow the EU to block certain foreign-direct investments and to suspend international obligations in numerous fields, including property rights.

The tariff announcement almost makes one forget that just the day before Trump blindsided European leaders by re-opening communications with President Putin. And the initial outlines of a potential agreement sketched by US Defense Secretary Hegseth led to much dismay in European capitals. The US is pivoting to the Pacific, and Europe now faces the choice to quickly scale up its own defense capabilities, or to let others decide the bloc’s future for it.

According to Politico, European leaders are still in a state that’s a “mix of fear and denial.” So far, denial also appears to be the markets’ coping mechanism for the big shifts that are afoot.

Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times,

From bud to bloom, harvest to vase, the trail of the rose that ends on Valentine’s Day is a model of supply chain synchronicity perfected over the past half-century.

More than 90 percent of the roses Americans will buy for Valentine’s Day were grown on co-op farms on the Andean slopes of Colombia and Ecuador, pinched to induce buds in November, cut only days ago, and flown to Miami International Airport to be shipped in refrigerated trucks within hours to wholesalers nationwide.

Rose stems cut in Colombia this morning could be in a florist shop in Columbia, South Carolina, tonight.

“If you ask most consumers where [the] flowers come from that are in their supermarket, most of them think they’re locally grown in somebody’s backyard, but they’re not,” Christine Boldt, executive vice president of the Association of Floral Importers of America, told The Epoch Times.

The association represents about 85 percent of the 150 or so floral importers that operate out of warehouses clustered within five miles of the airport in Miami, she said.

Last year, Americans spent $2.6 billion on flowers, with 40 percent purchased on Valentine’s Day, according to the National Retail Federation, which projects similar spending in 2025. Overall, U.S. consumers spent $25.8 billion celebrating Valentine’s Day in 2024, which is estimated to increase to a record $27.5 billion this year.

“The supply chain of flowers is a marvel of speed, planning, and global collaboration,” Elizabeth Daly, director of marketing and communications at the Society of American Florists, told The Epoch Times.

The society, which represents more than 7,000 florist retailers and wholesalers, cites estimates from USTradeNumbers.com that predict the nation’s 40,000 florists will sell approximately $1.67 billion in roses during the week of Valentine’s Day. Still, supermarkets and 1-800-FLOWERS are the largest single retailers of cut flowers.

More than 60 percent of Valentine’s roses come from Colombia, with Ecuador providing about 25 percent, Boldt said.

Colombia’s cut-flower industry, which did not export its first shipment until 1968, now wholesales more than $2 billion a year to the United States and employs more than 200,000 people—mostly women—on small farms of fewer than 20 acres, according to Asocolflores, the Colombian association of flower exporters.

When Colombian President Gustavo Petro refused to accept U.S. military flights carrying deportees to Colombia in late January, Trump threatened a 25 percent tariff on Colombian exports, including Valentine’s Day roses. Within a day, Petro relented, and Trump lifted the tariff.

“That was a turbulent ride,” Boldt said. “But we’re hoping that … everyone understands that Colombia, number one, is our partner. I mean, they are a main supplier, main source.”

An employee cuts roses for export at Bojaca Flowers in Bojacá, Colombia, on Feb. 7, 2024. More than 60 percent of Valentine’s roses come from Colombia, according to Christine Boldt. Raul Arboleda/AFP via Getty Images

The United States has a free trade agreement with Colombia, but not with Ecuador.

“We’ve been paying duties for over four years now because the Generalized System of Preferences expired,” Boldt said. “So we’ve been trying to work on that.”

The Generalized System of Preferences allows duty-free or low-duty imports from developing countries. The system expired during Trump’s first term, and bills seeking to renew it have stalled.

Loading Up, Shipping Out

The fulcrum on which the entire system pivots is Miami, where 8 billion or more flower stems arrive yearly for nationwide distribution. Miami has more than 100 refrigerated warehouses that employ more than 6,100 people, primarily west of Miami International Airport.

Boldt said that 91 percent of flowers enter the United States through southern Florida, with 90 percent to 95 percent by air and the remainder by sea containers.

On average, Miami International Airport handles 32,500 boxes of flowers per day. But as Valentine’s Day nears, up to 50 cargo jets deliver as many as 95,000 boxes of flowers daily, according to the Miami-Dade Aviation Department’s marketing division.

Within 24 hours of being cut, flowers are hauled from rural farms to Bogotá, Colombia, or Quito, Ecuador, where they are packed onto FedEx, UPS, or DHL temperature-controlled jets. The Colombian airline Avianca doubles its daily cargo flights to Miami in the month leading up to Valentine’s Day.

“Upon arriving at Miami International Airport, shipments undergo inspection by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, where specialists check for pests and diseases,“ Daly said. ”Once cleared, flowers are sent to wholesale distribution centers across the country, where cold storage ensures their freshness.”

Wholesalers sort the flowers by quality, color, and variety before shipping them to florists, she said.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection agriculture specialists inspect flowers for foreign pests or diseases in the FedEx cargo hub at Miami International Airport in Miami on Feb. 12, 2025. FedEx transfers millions of fresh flowers through the hub for Valentine’s Day by increasing air capacity from Colombia and Ecuador. Joe Raedle/Getty Images

“Florists then prepare the blooms for customers by trimming, hydrating, and creating bouquets,” Daly said. “This entire process—from South American farms to U.S. homes—occurs within days, showcasing the precision and time sensitivity required to ensure that flowers arrive fresh and vibrant for their recipients.”

For Leo Victoria, co-owner of American Floral Cargo, “Jan. 15 is the exact date Valentine’s Day started, and Feb. 10 is when it ends.”

Orders are finalized in December, and “the logistics part” begins with the final two weeks before the one-day holiday. It is a race against time, he said.

American Floral Cargo has hired 15 extra hands to load and unload trucks and sort out pallets of rose boxes for distribution, Victoria said.

Ten days before Valentine’s Day, in the early afternoon, his office and warehouse were in a midday lull. The morning dispatch of loaded trucks had left the warehouse bound for California and as far away as Vancouver, Canada.

By the weekend, trucks would be headed for the Carolinas and New England, Victoria said, with the last round of deliveries in the final days dedicated to Florida.

“By 6 p.m., the trucks will be bringing more flowers from the airport, and by morning, they are shipped, and the process begins again,” he said.

Next door at Armellini Logistics—one of 30 independent Miami trucking companies that almost exclusively transports flowers in refrigerated tractor trailers—owner Steve Armellini was dodging pallet jacks in the warehouse, which maintains a temperature of 38 degrees to 42 degrees Fahrenheit.

Steve Armellini, owner of Armellini Logistics, said his 80-year-old family-owned business ships flowers nationwide for 150 importers, at his company near Miami International Airport, in Miami on Feb. 4, 2025. John Haughey/The Epoch Times

About 580 trucks leave the warehouse each day, but it will be “700 a day for the next 10 days,” he said.

Armellini said his 80-year-old family business ships across the country and into Canada. The company also has six terminals where wholesalers can pick up deliveries in California, Dallas, Atlanta, and Florida.

Armellini’s largest single customer is Publix. The Florida-based grocery chain usually orders about “50 loads a week,” with that ballooning “to more than 100” as Valentine’s Day nears, he said. Publix actually has a desk in his office.

“If they deal with flowers, they deal with me somehow,” Armellini said, noting that he ships for 150 companies, including American Floral Cargo.

He said the company’s motto is “Tomorrow’s product today; we’re always a day ahead.”

“A lot of logistics going on,” he said, “flower after flower after flower.”

Read more here…

While the rest of the world gives Jamie Dimon flak for the leaked audio of him running a tight ship at his bank this past week, it was mostly music to our ears.

After years of junior bankers on Wall Street – many of whom are now starting with salaries close to $200,000/year – complaining about not having enough time off, being forced to work weekends and lack of vegan options in the company cafeteria (we just assume), audio surfaced this past week with JP Morgan’s Chief Executive Officer launching into a tirade about ‘working from home’.

As Barron’s notes, employees are frustrated by the bank’s upcoming five-day office mandate and lower-than-expected raises and bonuses despite record profits. Dimon made remarks to a group of employees at an internal town hall this week.

“We allowed three days and two days. But here are the problems, OK? And they are substantial. The younger generation is being damaged by this. They may or may not be in your particular staff, but they are being left behind—socially, in terms of ideas, and in meeting people. In fact, my guess is most of you live in communities a hell of a lot less diverse than this room,” Dimon said.

“And so, it had all these kinds of effects. We actually see these other kids slowly being left behind, and I won’t do that to younger kids. Now, it’s hard to say… ‘You come in, but not your bosses.’ And the other thing, which was full of sh—, which I couldn’t stand listening to anymore, is, ‘Well, if I come in, I just Zoomed to people somewhere.’ So, I also said what you can’t do—which is, we have people Zooming in from different floors. If you’re in the building, go to the meeting.”

“We also had—and you know I’m right about this one—a lot of you were on the f— Zoom, and you were doing the following: looking at your mail, sending texts to each other about what an a— the other person is, not paying attention, not reading your stuff. And if you don’t think that slows down efficiency, creativity, and creates rudeness—it does.”

The CEO continued, railing on the bank’s headcount: “Meanwhile, headcount has gone up by 50,000 people in four, five years. And people tell me, ‘Well, you know…’”

“We don’t need all those people. We were putting people in jobs because the people weren’t doing the job they were hired to do in the first place. It simply doesn’t work. I will not be responsible for a company like that, OK? And I’m sorry. Now—you have a choice. You don’t have to work at JPMorgan. So, for those of you who don’t want to work at the company, that’s fine with me.”

“I’m not mad at you, don’t be mad at me. It’s a free country, you can walk with your feet. But this company is going to set our own standards and do it our own way. I’ve had it with this kind of stuff. I’ve been working seven days a goddamn week since COVID, and I come in, and—where is everybody else? They’re here, they’re there, the Zooms, and the Zooms don’t show up… That’s not how you run a great company.”

He continued: “We didn’t build this great company by doing that, by doing the same…s— that everyone else does. So, you wait and see what happens over time to companies that are in this business. I mean, I think you can be in other industries and do it.”

The other thing—and this has nothing to do with work from home, so I apologize. There will be some exceptions made, but I will see them personally, OK? I’m not going to put up with any of this stuff… There’s no special deals in this company.

“When I found out that people were doing that—you don’t do that in my goddamn meetings. If you’re going to meet with me, you’ve got my attention, you’ve got my focus, I don’t bring my goddamn phone, I’m not sending texts to people. It simply doesn’t work. It doesn’t work for creativity, it slows down decision-making. And don’t give me this s— that work-from-home Friday works. I call a lot of people on Fridays, and there’s not a goddamn person you can get a hold of.”

Jamie Diamond has seen enough

“Fucking zoom” 😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/0fbCBWtRMF

— @jason (@Jason) February 14, 2025

Dimon concluded: “And remember, the team’s got to work. I manage a company, and we have an operating committee meeting, and we’re not all there. Sometimes, there’s people Zooming in from somewhere, they travel, but all day, we’re talking to each other—‘What about this? What about that?’ with the constant follow-up, which you don’t have by Zoom on any team.”

“Most of these big financial companies, everyone had winks and nods and friends of friends, and special this—there’s none of that. And that’s what this became, OK? I think that pollutes a company over time.

The other thing which I’ve noticed more and more is the creeping—and you guys know I hate bureaucracy, remember bureaucracy busters?—it just doesn’t stop. It’s us. I blame myself, too. How many of you take training classes that you think are a waste of time? Compliance classes that you think are a waste of time? Or go through legal, risk, compliance-type stuff—multiple committees to get multiple approvals? How many of you think there’s a lot of bureaucracy that we gotta do something about? Just raise your hand in general. That’s part of the problem.”

“That’s unacceptable to me. What I worry about—I want the company to be as successful in 10 years as it is today. What happened to GE, Sears, Kmart? What happened to Nokia, BlackBerry? And then you had Apple and Amazon. It’s even worse in financial services—what happened to Bear Stearns? Lehman Brothers? Travelers? Citibank? A hundred percent of mortgage brokerages—all bankrupt.”

“Everyone fired, jobs lost, reputations lost, and it was complacency and bureaucracy. In every single case. The people weren’t stupid, but the places got slower and more accepting of not doing their homework, and stuff like that. And I won’t put up with it.”

And the cherry on top — as we noted earlier in the week, Dimon, who was once all in on DEI initiatives, is now railing against them: 

“I saw how we were spending money on some of this stupid sh-t, and it really pissed me off,” Jamie Dimon said during a townhall discussion about JPM’s DEI spending choices. “I’m just gonna cancel them. I don’t like wasted money in bureaucracy.” cc: @robbystarbuck

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 14, 2025

Days after Democrats threatened to shut down the government in response to Elon Musk and DOGE shutting down the government – planning to deprive House Speaker Mike Johnson of a few Democrat votes to override GOP hardliner holdouts to avoid an upcoming government shutdown, the joke’s on them. 

On Thursday, hard-line conservatives and House Republican leadership reached a last-minute agreement on the party’s budget resolution, smoothing the path for the measure to advance out of committee and setting the stage for a broader push on former President Donald J. Trump’s legislative priorities.

The deal, brokered shortly before a key committee vote, allows Representative Jodey Arrington (R-TX) and the chairman of the Budget Committee, to adjust spending caps and tax provisions within the framework. If approved, the resolution would unlock the budget reconciliation process, which Republicans aim to use to push Trump’s policies forward without Democratic support.

“This is it. We declare victory,” Representative Andy Harris (R-MD) and chair of the House Freedom Caucus, said following the agreement. “We have a bill that delivers meaningful deficit reduction, funds the border, and advances the president’s tax policy. It all happens here.“

A Balancing Act on Spending and Taxes

The budget resolution, released by Arrington on Wednesday, outlines at least $1.5 trillion in spending cuts across government programs, with a target of $2 trillion in deficit reduction. It also sets a $4.5 trillion cap on the deficit impact of extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts while allocating $300 billion in additional funding for border security and defense.

Negotiations in recent weeks had focused on bridging differences between fiscal conservatives demanding deeper spending reductions and members of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, who sought a higher cap to accommodate Trump’s tax agenda. The agreement allows Arrington to adjust the spending floor and tax cap based on final deficit reduction figures, potentially increasing the tax cut allowance to $5 trillion if additional savings are found elsewhere.

“This budget put forward by the chairman is a giant step forward to reduce spending, the primary driver of the inflation, and the expansion of the government largesse that is strangling the future of our children and grandchildren” said Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), signaling his support for the measure after expressing skepticism earlier in the week, adding “I am proud of what the chairman has put forward.”

Hard-Liners Move Toward Support

The deal appears to have won over key conservative holdouts on the House Budget Committee. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), a member of the Freedom Caucus, had voiced opposition to the resolution on Wednesday, citing concerns over Medicaid work requirements and block grants. By Thursday, he expressed optimism about its chances of passing out of committee.

Republicans can afford to lose only two votes on the committee to advance the resolution, assuming all Democrats oppose it. The manager’s amendment could also secure support from Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO) and chair of the Ways and Means Committee, who had pushed for a higher tax cap.

“Let me just say that a 10-year extension of President Trump’s expiring provisions is over $4.7 trillion, according to [the Congressional Budget Office],” Smith said earlier this week. “Anything less would be saying that President Trump is wrong on tax policy.”

Intel shares are on track for their strongest weekly gain on record, based on Bloomberg trading data dating back to 1982. Investor enthusiasm surged after Vice President JD Vance, speaking at an AI summit in Paris on Tuesday, noted the Trump administration would boost domestic chip production. Momentum continued on Wednesday after a report from Robert W. Baird analysts suggested that the Trump team is working to broker a joint venture between Intel and TSMC.

On Tuesday, at the AI summit in Paris, VP Vance told the audience: “The Trump administration will ensure that the most powerful AI systems are built in the U.S. with American-designed and manufactured chips.”

One day later, that was followed by a note via Robert W. Baird analysts claiming that the Trump team was pushing Intel and TSMC to form a joint chip production venture. 

“There are discussions from the Asia supply chain that the U.S. government will get involved in potentially the following: TSMC would send engineers to Intel’s 3nm/2nm fab, applying the company’s know-how to ensure that the fab and subsequent manufacturing projects from Intel become viable,” Baird’s Tristan Gerra told clients. 

Gerra said, “The fab could be spun off into a new entity jointly owned by TSMC and Intel, and run by TSMC. The new entity would receive U.S. Chip Act funding.”

“While there is no confirmation and potential completion of this project could be lengthy, we think this move makes sense,” she noted. 

On a separate note, Goldman’s Bruce Lu, Toshiya Hari, and others provided clients on Friday with a closer look at the JV rumors involving Intel and TSMC: 

Media has speculated that TSMC and Intel (covered by Toshiya Hari) may be forming a joint venture to enhance U.S. chip manufacturing capabilities or that Intel may be considering spinning off its semiconductor fabrication unit to create a collaborative venture with TSMC with TSMC providing technical expertise and engineers to support advanced chip production at Intel’s fabs.

At a glance: Fundamentally, the strategic merit for a potential JV seems unclear as TSMC and Intel operate under different business models and different tool sets which would likely require extra investment e.g. for purchasing/retiring equipment. For Intel and TSMC, even when looking at comparable technology nodes, some processes and equipment used are different. Also, Intel’s equipment is generally for older process nodes, which is not the primary area of focus for capacity expansion for TSMC (i.e. TSMC’s spending currently is mostly for its N2 expansion).

Additionally, TSMC’s business strategy has been to remain independent and avoid entering into JVs that could compromise its neutral status with other clients. More importantly, TSMC’s advanced nodes technology is its own property with proprietary processes, and is a key competitive advantage. Sharing this technology with a direct competitor like Intel could undermine its market position. Additionally, TSMC has historically been very cautious about sharing its intellectual property with other companies, especially with those in direct competition within the semiconductor space. Therefore, a technology transfer agreement between TSMC and Intel would seem uncharacteristic of TSMC’s strategy.

Another outstanding issue is potential anti-trust implications of any TSMC/Intel partnership/JV given the dominant market positions of the two companies. However, to note, Intel and UMC announced a foundry collaboration in January 2024, the two companies will jointly develop a 12nm process platform. UMC will be leveraging Intel’s existing equipment in Intel’s existing fabs, with mass production timeline expected to begin in 2027 (see also: Intel/UMC new foundry collaboration; we view it as a positive strategic move for both companies, 26 January 2024).

The JV rumors have been more than enough to spark buying panic in beaten-down Intel shares. 

There’s a tweet for that. 

Intel becoming a meme stonk?

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 13, 2025

Intel may log one of the best weeks on record if gains hold through Friday’s close. 

Here’s Tom’s Hardware’s take on the rumors:

Ongoing geopolitical turmoil, coupled with Intel’s financial and execution struggles, have generated various rumors surrounding the blue giant. In this case, significant technological and business hurdles — ranging from differences in tooling process recipes at Intel and TSMC to TSMC’s lack of incentive to aid a competitor — cast doubt on the feasibility of such a partnership.

. . . 

Walmart has secured its position as America’s “price discount juggernaut” retailer as the Biden-Harris inflation storm sparked a scramble by big box retailers, supermarket retail chains, and discount chains into a value war to retain consumer market share. 

As previously noted, Walmart has emerged as the clear winner in the “trade-down phenomenon” that continues today as more affluent shoppers gravitate to the retail giant, and a new Goldman report shows this trend is only gaining pace. 

Goldman’s Kate McShane, Mark Jordan, and others used retail data from HundredX, including a household income breakdown and Net Purchase Intent trends, to show that Walmart has continued to gain market share of upper-income households, while other retailers, including Costco and Target, have marginally increased their share of lower-income households relative to the industry over the last year. 

“In our view, the share shift among income cohorts is likely due in part to upper-income consumers seeking out convenience, everyday value, and a comprehensive assortment through Walmart, which over-indexes to lower-income consumers relative to COST and TGT,” McShane told clients. 

The analysts add more color on the shifting consumer trends:

However, over the course of the last year, certain companies have increased their customer share of lower-income households relative to the industry average. In Jan ’24, TGT’s share was -5.4% lower than the industry, but it is now -3.0% lower in Jan ’25. Similarly, COST’s share in Jan ’24 was -7.7% lower than the industry, but it is now only -4.9% lower. In comparison, Walmart’s share of lower-income consumers relative to the industry has been decreasing: in Jan ’24, the company’s share was +9.0% higher than the industry but is now only +5.5% higher. More of Walmart’s customer base has been shifting towards upper-income households, where share was -9.0% lower than the industry in Jan ’24, but it is now only -5.5% lower. In general, trends point towards companies such as COST and TGT increasing their lower-income audience share, while Walmart is shifting towards increasing its upper-income audience share.

The analysts noted that price discounts and free delivery of goods likely led to a growing share of upper-income shoppers trading down to Walmart:

In 3Q, WMT saw higher engagement across income cohorts, with upper-income households continuing to account for the majority of share gains. In our view, this is likely due in part to WMT’s expanded convenience offerings (e.g., free delivery through Walmart+ on $35+ orders, curbside pick up), store remodels, more comprehensive assortment through Marketplace, and a continued focus on every day value, with our pricing studies showing that Walmart US grocery prices remain ~11% below peers, on average.

Here’s the income breakdown of shoppers at each of the retail giants:

The takeaway is that the multi-year inflation storm has transformed the nation’s consumers into Walmart shoppers—yet another sign that living standards continue to erode due to horrible decision-making by elected and unelected elites in the DC swamp. This has even impacted wealthy consumers who must trade down to Walmart. The financial misery DC folks have inflicted on all consumers has unified the nation, and many are thrilled with DOGE disrupting the swamp. It’s called payback.

By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

Elliott Management is pushing for major asset sales at BP to address the undervalued shares of the UK-based supermajor after the U.S. activist investor built a stake of nearly 5% worth about $4.75 billion (3.8 billion British pounds), the Financial Times reported on Thursday, quoting sources familiar with the matter.

News of Elliott’s recently-built stake in BP, which now makes it the third-largest shareholder, broke this weekend, pushing BP’s shares soaring on Monday.

On Tuesday, BP’s stock fell as the company reported earnings below expectations. The fourth-quarter profit missed the analyst consensus estimate and was the lowest quarterly profit since the fourth quarter of 2020 when the pandemic was hitting global oil demand. BP attributed the lower earnings to weaker realized refining margins, as well as higher impact from turnaround activity, seasonally lower customer volumes, and fuel margins.

In the Q4 earnings release, BP also teased a fundamental reset of strategy as it seeks to push up its stock performance and regain investor trust.

“Building on the actions taken in the past 12 months, we now plan to fundamentally reset our strategy and drive further improvements in performance, all in service of growing cash flow and returns,” BP’s chief executive Murray Auchincloss said in a statement.

BP’s leadership will communicate its new strategy, which “will be a new direction for bp”, at a Capital Markets Update on February 26, Auchincloss added.

Analysts and investors expect even more cuts to the low-carbon business and a pledge to boost oil and gas production at the capital markets day later this month.

The pressure became more intense after reports emerged that Elliott Management had bought a stake in BP and would be pushing for changes in strategy, or even for board reshuffles.

This week, Elliott took aim at another large oil company—it demands changes at U.S. refiner Phillips 66 after amassing a $2.5 billion stake.